Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

171 U.S. 379

43 L. Ed. 204

Docket Nos. 540 and 541.

White v. Butler

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • WHITE et alv.BUTLER
  • SAMEv.RUCKMAN

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1898-05-31

2 counsel of record

Relies on White v. Butler · Wilson v. State of North Carolina

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · 9–0 · Opinion by John Marshall Harlan · Decided 1898-05-31

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1979

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

20189819001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Asst. Atty. Gen. Boyd and Joseph H. Gaines, for appellants.

Charles J. Faulkner, for appellees.

Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of the court.

¶1

Butler, the appellee in the first of the above cases, was a storekeeper of the United States at the Hannis distillery at Martinsburg, W. Va.

¶2

Ruckman, the appellee in the second case, was also a storekeeper at the same distillery.

¶3

The bill in each case is substantially like that in White v. Berry (just decided) 18 Sup. Ct. 917. The relief asked by Butler and Ruckman is the same as that asked by Berry, and the decree rendered in behalf of each was the same as that rendered in Berry's Case.

¶4

For the reasons stated in the opinion just delivered in White v. Berry, the decree in each of the above cases must be reversed, and the causes remanded, with directions to dismiss the bills. It is so ordered.

/171/us/379 · .json · Public domain